The government of Newfoundland is downlisting the status of the American marten, due to increasing populations on the island. The marten is being downlisted from threatened to vulnerable under the provincial Endangered Species Act. The Newfoundland pine marten (Martes americana atrata) is one of only 14 mammal species native to the island, and its population is considered not only geographicly isolated by genetically distinct from other martens.
First considered endangered in 1996, it was one of the first species formally designated under the provincial Endangered Species Act in 2002. Recovery programs have been in place since the 1990s. The current population is estimated at between 2,500 and 2,800 mature animals.
The new listing “reflects years of cooperation and hard work,” said Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture Minister Elvis Loveless.
In recent years, the wildlife profession has paid increasing attention to supporting gay and transgender wildlifers. Organizations like TWS’ Out in the Field and a growing number of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in universities, agencies and organizations have worked to build inclusivity for LGBTQ+ wildlifers. But in a recent opinion paper in the Wildlife Society Bulletin, a group of authors argues that wildlife sciences need to do more.
We caught up with lead author Nathan Alexander, postdoctoral research associate at the University of Illinois, and co-author Jaime Coon, assistant professor of biology and environmental sustainability at Earlham College, to discuss why they believe wildlife sciences need to be more inclusive. Their responses are edited for brevity and clarity.
What was the motivation for this paper?
Jaime Coon: We came up with the idea for this paper after several experiences we both had that made us feel unseen as LGBTQ+ people within the field. In all DEI conversations, there was so much focus on interpersonal efforts. Whenever we brought up broader systemic issues that also needed to be addressed, academics would be confused about their relevance. There is clearly a need for increased education on these issues within the wildlife sciences and other allied fields. As a result, we convened a large working group of LGBTQ+ scientists across career stages. Once we started talking, we realized our experiences with being “unseen” were not so individual.
We also specifically wanted to publish a paper in a discipline-specific journal, because that’s who needs to see this information, so we are thrilled that the Wildlife Society Bulletin chose to publish it.
Jaime Coon.
Credit: Evan Coon
How open have you found the wildlife profession to be to addressing LGBTQ+ inclusion?
Nathan Alexander: Prior to 2019, it was not something I heard discussed within the wildlife profession. When working the fieldwork circuit, inclusion felt highly variable. I would be out on some projects and not on others, depending on cues I received from co-workers and employers. When I started working as a teaching assistant during my master’s program, I had students ask me about whether or not they had to change majors or ask questions about acceptance in the field because they were gay. I think we’re seeing a hunger for these types of discussions in the field currently, which is incredibly hopeful.
Nathan Alexander. Credit: K. Fountain
Is LGBTQ+ marginalization in the wildlife profession a byproduct of marginalization in society as a whole, or are there different dynamics within the profession?
JJC: Both. Marginalization in society as a whole 100% affects our field. I see it when I do my fieldwork in areas of the U.S. that are unwelcoming to queer and trans individuals, in places where laws are hostile to my very identity. My workplace can be extremely welcoming, and yet anti-trans laws where I live still add safety concerns and limit the life and work options for LGBTQ+ folks.
There are also field-specific barriers. The wildlife field relies heavily on temporary field jobs early on in our training. These field jobs do not provide stable incomes and are less accessible to people with less financial resources or family wealth. LGBTQ+ youth experience higher rates of family disownment and homelessness, potentially making it more difficult for some to pursue this critical stage of career development. Further, fieldwork may take place in locations that are unwelcoming or even dangerous for LGBTQ+ folks. We also rely heavily on university education in our field, which comes with its own set of systemic and structural barriers for LGBTQ+ people.
When I started working as a teaching assistant during my master’s program, I had students ask me about whether or not they had to change majors or ask questions about acceptance in the field because they were gay.
Nathan Alexander
Is inclusion improving?
NA: I believe it is. There are more discussions on how to ensure people are safe and included, and we are seeing more willingness to engage, discuss and publish on these topics. I think the next step to advance our efforts is to consider these broader dynamics and acknowledge that we are operating within structures that are larger than our field. Even if a department or agency wishes to be inclusive, state legislation may create barriers that cannot be addressed solely within wildlife sciences.
Much of your paper is dedicated to LGBTQ+ history in society at large. I imagine lots of readers will wonder what that’s doing in a wildlife science journal.
NA: History and legacy effects—understanding how past policies impact and shape our current landscapes—are central components of wildlife science. If we want to understand our field, we need to acknowledge and understand how past and current policies affect who is included in our profession. I have multiple friends who dropped out of high school due to LGBTQ+ persecution and friends who couldn’t afford college due to their family disowning them. If we understand the historic practices, we can understand the current landscape, and we can identify ongoing gaps that prevent marginalized people from pursuing education or a wildlife career.
JJC: We cannot design solutions unless we understand the root causes of problems. This paper is all about increasing competency on the root causes of oppression—historical, sociocultural and more—and how these causes connect to the wildlife field.
Is the profession losing qualified wildlifers due to LGBTQ+ marginalization?
NA: It’s hard to say because data tracking of LGBTQ+ demographics is poor. From personal experience, we would have lost qualified wildlifers if I hadn’t had one-on-one talks with LGBTQ+ students wanting to pursue a wildlife career. I can only imagine that there are institutions that don’t have LGBTQ+ people further along in their careers that students can talk to. It is not a resource I’ve had in my career. I think there’s more support currently, and people are able to find LGBTQ+ wildlife professionals more easily now that there are organizations like Out in the Field.
The fact that we are having these discussions and journals like the Wildlife Society Bulletin are open to publishing these discussions, I think, is a clear signal to anyone wanting to pursue a wildlife career that inclusion is increasing. There may be barriers that LGBTQ+ people currently face, but there is a desire—and there are ongoing actions—to ensure our field is open.
Biologists in Georgia are working to understand how to combat white-nose syndrome, which is taking a toll on bats in the state. The disease, which can wipe out entire colonies of bats, has been found in 15 north Georgia counties, and the fungus that causes it has been found in at least six others.
Since the disease arrived in the state, it has decimated populations of the endangered northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). Researchers have been investigating whether treating areas where the bats hibernate with volatile organic compounds could help control the fungus.
At one site, known as the Black Diamond Tunnel, over 5,000 tricolored bats once hibernated there, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports. Three years later, the colony had shrunk to 152. After fumigation, their numbers have been on the rise. This year, researchers counted 720 bats, “the most they’ve observed since their treatments began,” the Journal-Constitution reports.
The contemporary era presents unique challenges for wildlife conservation, especially for younger generations like mine.
From the heart of rural Nigeria to the academic halls of Boston University, I have witnessed the multifaceted threats facing wildlife and the intricate dynamics of human-wildlife interactions. One pressing issue that resonates across these diverse landscapes is the escalating demand for bushmeat or other wildlife byproducts. That could be in the form of pangolin scales or elephant tusks. These are emblematic of broader challenges like habitat loss, climate change and socioeconomic disparities.
Growing up in Ijebu Ode, Nigeria, I saw firsthand how traditional bushmeat consumption practices have evolved into a lucrative trade. Factors driving that trade ranged from cultural preferences to economic necessity.
Olunusi displays a taxidermized zebra head from Kainji Lake National Park, Nigeria at a cultural festival in Niger State Nigeria in 2018. Olunusi was an intern at the National Park at the time. Image Courtesy: Bright Olunusi.
The reliance on wildlife trade often stems from limited educational opportunities and climate-induced disruptions to agriculture, leaving communities vulnerable to exploitation and perpetuating a cycle of dependence. In urban centers like Ibadan, Nigeria, this demand persists, exacerbating the strain on already diminished wildlife populations.
My academic pursuits further illuminated the global dimensions of wildlife conservation. While studying at Boston University, I grappled with the complexities of human-wildlife conflict in developed regions, where urban expansion encroaches upon natural habitats, triggering confrontations and necessitating sometimes lethal interventions. Climate change emerges as a common thread, exacerbating these tensions by altering ecosystems and driving species out of their historical ranges.
Olunusi holds a pangolin at a Wildlife Bushmeat Market in Nigeria in 2019. Image Courtesy: Bright Olunusi
In addressing these challenges, my generation must embrace a holistic approach that recognizes the interconnectedness of environmental, social and economic factors. Environmental education initiatives, particularly targeting underserved communities, can foster awareness and empower individuals to pursue sustainable livelihoods. Economic empowerment programs offer viable alternatives to wildlife trade, promoting resilience in the face of climate-induced disruptions.
Moreover, concerted efforts are needed to enhance climate adaptation strategies and mitigate the drivers of habitat degradation. This requires collaboration across sectors and borders, harnessing the collective expertise of governments, policymakers, researchers, businesses and communities. From implementing land-use planning measures to promoting renewable energy solutions, every sector has a role to play in safeguarding our planet’s biodiversity.
A headshot of Olunusi in her graduation cap. Image Courtesy: Bright Olunusi.
At its core, wildlife conservation is a shared responsibility that transcends geographical boundaries and cultural divides. It demands collective action and a steadfast commitment to preserving the integrity of our ecosystems for future generations. As stewards of the Earth, we must heed this call to action, recognizing that our choices today will shape the fate of wildlife and humanity alike. Together, let us rise to the challenge and strive to create a more sustainable and harmonious coexistence between humans and the natural world.
Wildlife Vocalizations is a collection of short personal perspectives from people in the field of wildlife sciences. Learn more aboutWildlife Vocalizations, and read other contributions.
Submit your story for Wildlife Vocalizations or nominate your peers and colleagues to encourage them to share their story.
Header Image: Olunusi teaches a diverse group of people from all continents of the world about human wildlife conflict in Massachusetts, using coyotes (Canis latrans) as a case study. This presentation took place in the Maldives in December 2023 and was a sponsored summer program on climate change. Image Courtesy: Bright Olunusi.
The recent avian flu strain has adapted to spread between birds and marine mammals, posing a threat to wildlife conservation, researchers found.
In a study published in Emerging Infectious Diseases, researchers used genomic testing to characterize the highly pathogenic avian influenza virus H5N1 in marine wildlife in South America. They found the virus was nearly identical in samples of four sea lions and a seal, as well as a tern.
“This confirms that while the virus may have adapted to marine mammals, it still has the ability to infect birds,” said first author Agustina Rimondi, a virologist from the National Institute of Agricultural Technology in Argentina. “It is a multi-species outbreak.”
The virus has affected wild bird populations and domestic poultry around the world. Since 2022, H5N1 in South America has killed at least 600,000 wild birds and 50,000 mammals, including elephant seals and sea lions in Argentina, Chile and Peru.
The Wildlife Professional is an exclusive benefit of membership in The Wildlife Society. Published six times annually, the magazine presents timely research news and analysis of trends in the wildlife profession.
Don’t miss another issue! Join today to start receiving The Wildlife Professional in your mailbox and all the other great benefits of TWS membership.
Mountains play some unique ecological roles, with diverse ecosystems that host a gamut of species that can shift from bottom to top, rainy side to dry side, sun to shade. For species on the move due to climate change, mountains can offer a refuge. But mountains often experience a higher rate of climate change than other areas. In the March/April issue of The Wildlife Professional, we explore these mountain ecosystems and the ways that species are responding to the changes taking place around them.
Our special focus looks at some unique ways that wildlife professionals are reaching out to the public, from innovative social media posts to virtual wildlife contests to involving the public in research work. John Koprowski, the 2022 Aldo Leopold Memorial Award recipient, shares how a purple bike can transform our relationship with the natural world. And TWS Member Engagement Manager Mariah Beyers shares some of the many reasons to be charmed by the 2024 Annual Conference in Baltimore, Maryland.
Watch for the issue in your mailbox, or log in and check it out online.
The Canadian Wildlife Service is considering allowing limited sandhill crane hunting in northern Ontario. The proposal would allow hunters to harvest one crane per season in the Hudson and James Bay Lowlands and allow hunting in agricultural fields in several other areas.
Sandhill cranes (Grus canadensis) have been increasing in numbers in the region, but with their return has been an increase in damages to farmers’ fields. No date has been set for a decision. The earliest a hunt could take place is fall 2026.
When Mexican farmers harvest agave for tequila before the plant flowers, bats don’t have a shot at pollination.
The core of the plant, which looks something like a pineapple, is what’s used to create tequila. All the sugar needed for fermentation is concentrated there. Because agave puts all its energy into producing its towering, flower-filled spikes, farmers collect the cores before the plants bloom. Once the agave flowers, it dies.
But bats, like the Mexican long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris nivalis), need these flowers to feed.
Irene Zepata-Moran, a PhD student at the University of Wyoming, led a study published in Environmental Research Communications looking at how to balance the needs of blue agave farmers with the needs of bats and biodiversity.
Some tequila producers who cultivate their own agave do leave plants aside to benefit bats. That allows them to place special holograms on their bottles to show consumers that they are bat-friendly—and to charge more for an environmentally friendly product.
But many farmers don’t produce their own tequila. They supply their crops to tequila houses. For them, there’s no incentive to let plants flower.
To find out how farmers can be involved in more sustainable agave production, Zepata-Moran interviewed farmers and tequila producers and provided them with a choice experiment.
Known as a jimador, a Mexican farmer harvests agave plants to produce tequila. Credit: Celso FLORES
She offered them a series of hypothetical options. Would they enter into a program to leave part of their crops untouched for monetary incentives? What about nonmonetary incentives, like training to use greenhouses to grow seeds produced by bat-pollinated flowers? Would they enter into a program to increase their crop yields?
Currently, farmers grow new agave by using clone offshoots or planting a clipping from another plant. But leaving some plants untouched and letting bats do the work can increase the genetic diversity of the plants and improve the health of the crop.
“Genetic diversity in blue agave crops has decreased over time,” said Zepata-Moran, who completed the study as part of her master’s dissertation. “What happens when we don’t have genetic diversity in the population is they are more prone to diseases.”
In general, the farmers preferred monetary incentives. “They like to be compensated,” she said. In this scenario, farmers would be paid for the plants they couldn’t sell to tequila producers because they let them bloom.
They also had a willingness to let plants flower if it increased their yield. Zepata-Moran said she heard from some longtime farmers who were seeing smaller plant cores and other problems, likely due to low genetic diversity.
Before strategies like these could be put into place, Zepeta-Moran said, there needs to be more research on the role this iconic crop plays in the farmers’ heritage and how their yields could improve with more bat-friendly techniques.
“There is a cultural value that exists in terms of tequila production and agave production,” Zepata-Moran said. “It’s something that people are proud of.”
Plant green-up times are shifting, but birds’ spring migrations aren’t keeping up. In a recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers found climate change is altering the plants’ timing, affecting birds’ ability to reach the food they need during breeding. Using satellite images, researchers compared green-up timing with bird migration data from the citizen science app eBird for 150 bird species that nest in North America.
“The findings “emphasize the mounting challenge migratory animals face in following en route resources in a changing climate,” the authors wrote.
Imagine a world of conservation without conflict, where landowners, state and federal agencies, and environmental organizations all got along, working toward the common goal of helping imperiled species thrive.
It’s easy to see such a notion as a pipe-dream in a world fraught with endless lawsuits and protests. But one organization believes such a step is possible—in fact, they have made great achievements in the conservation world operating on such a principle in just over five years.
Leopoldo Miranda-Castro is the executive director of Conservation Without Conflict. Credit: Conservation Without Conflict
Conservation Without Conflict, a coalition involving state and federal wildlife managers, environmentalists, energy and forestry companies, and other private stakeholders, was founded in 2017 on the principle that while stakeholders often dispute the shape and regulations surrounding at-risk species, they usually agree on the basic tenet of conserving our natural world. Rather than seeing conservation as a conflict between opposing parties, the coalition seeks to find ways to encourage collaboration. Members include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ducks Unlimited, Southern Company, the National Wildlife Federation, Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute, and many others.
Fresh from the coalition’s 2024 summit meeting in Arlington, Virginia last week, The Wildlife Society caught up with executive director of Conservation Without Conflict, Leopoldo Miranda-Castro. Our conversation below is edited for style and brevity.
How did the summit go?
The summit was really good—there was a lot of energy in the room. We had probably about 45 different organizations and individuals there. One of the things I wanted to accomplish was to reenergize the coalition. Because of COVID, we couldn’t meet for a few years, so we wanted to bring everybody back.
What progress has Conservation Without Conflict made?
Some of our biggest accomplishments so far are bringing people together to discuss potential issues, identifying barriers, and knocking down those barriers. Those could be policy barriers or disincentives. They could be on-the-ground issues—you name it.
Specifically, one of the big things that the coalition members have recently been able to accomplish was the first-ever partnership between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and industrial timberland owners, Resource Management Service, LLC (RMS). That included a private lands agreement to voluntarily reintroduce reticulated flatwoods salamanders (Ambystoma bishopi) onto their land in the Florida panhandle. That’s the first time the USFWS’ tool for conservation partnerships has been used for those purposes. That is a deal I’m extremely happy about. It took many, many years, and finally they were able to crack that code and implement it.
What were some of the conflicts you have had to work through?
One of them is how to protect private landowners’ privacy when they enter into agreements with the government, and especially when dealing with listed and at-risk species. A lot of landowners are looking for that kind of information. How do we minimize the risk to those landowners in terms of liability or any other type of risk? When proactively sharing site-specific data with the government, that data may be available to the public, including organizations that may use it in ways that may affect these landowners. For example, environmental groups may file a lawsuit to try to force landowners to do things the way these groups want. Lowering those risks to a level that private landowners can manage them and benefit species—and keeping those working lands working—creates kind of a win-win situation. Before the RMS timber company agreement, those were concerns from the private landowner’s perspective. We hope that that model, now that there’s a precedent, could be expanded across the nation. It’s a really simple tool.
What role will Conservation Without Conflict play moving forward?
We closed out the summit by asking the participants about next steps and actions. We had short-, mid- and long-term actions. Short-term and mid-term goals include increased communication and supporting more on-the-ground conservation.
But I’m really excited about long-term ideas, like bringing up young professionals and students—people who are starting their careers right now—into the Conservation Without Conflict collaborative framework. Eventually, we’ll be able to change the culture of conservation within the NGO community, landowners, industry and agencies. Our vision is that collaborative conservation will be the default approach to conservation, instead of conflict and litigation.
Even longer term, we plan to develop some curriculum programs in academia where we can have minors and majors where Conservation Without Conflict frameworks can be applied and learned as part of an actual degree. Eventually, we’ll get there, and we’ll be able to affect long-term change.
What’s at stake if we don’t start minimizing conflict in the conservation community?
We will continue to be too polarized. At the end of the day, it will affect working lands because we will eliminate incentives to have healthy economies and healthy human communities. And also, the species will suffer because they will be caught in the middle of conflict. We’re going to have a lot of regulations and paperwork. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still important to have good regulations. But we need to have regulations that actually make sense and that provide incentives to everybody, including private landowners on working lands, to do the right thing, because they are already doing it—that’s why the species are still there.
